(Evolutionists) Is calling someone stupid just an excuse?

I find it interesting that evolutionists think that creationists are not smart or lacking in proper education. I've read Dawkins, Gould, Behe, and Hawkings among others. I have a Ph.D., albeit not in biology, but I have taken several biology courses. I am successful in my career and I have a wonderful family and home. However, in the mind of an atheist, I am considered a fool for my faith in Jesus Christ and my belief that the world was created.

Why is it that I am written off as stupid; yet, I could easily demonstrate a higher plane of intellect than many atheists on this forum?

What is more likely, that I am simple or that we simply disagree?

Please Note: The candor of your answer will give me a good impression of your level of cognitive ability.


My Ph.D. is in the field of Education

My Dissertation was on Certification Requirements: Do high standards for certification ensure quality educational leaders

Update 2:

My use of the word Candor

2. freedom from bias; fairness; impartiality: to consider an issue with candor.

An angry reply without substance would give me some insight on a person's cognitive processes. If you disagree, I am not offended.

27 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I'll suppose that you're telling the truth, which, I'm sure you're not, simply by a few of the tells in your message. I'll suppose as such because your imaginary situation is possible.

    I don't believe Christians are necessarily idiots, and not many Taoists believe that at all. It's not very logical to say "Creationist = Idiot" because that implies a million and one presuppositions and a very very jaundiced psychological map.

    You have to ask the question "Why do they believe in creationism as opposed to evolutionism despite the fact that they've been thoroughly educated on evolution, and the fact that the world could not have possibly been created in 7 days 6000 years ago."

    There can be a million answers, but the most prominant one is this: "It's too much work to find my own answer, and this one fits--if I die, and I'm right, wonderful. I go to heaven, if I'm wrong, oh well, I won't remember anyway. It's a good guidebook for morals, and keeps me doing the right thing. Christianity has made me a better person."

    Does that make you an idiot? No, it just makes you weak in one area of development. Who cares if you're weak in one area if you're strong in countless others. If you do good work, helping people, making the world a better place, that's really all that matters.

    The conflict arises if you're pushing theocratic reform in Government, that tries to subject the whole world to your ideology simply because you haven't got the mental reserves to focus on what you really believe happened in the beginning of it all, or when you're one of the loud voices screaming out against stem-cell research technology, or any other philosophically possibly morally objectionable science on the premise of a few verses in a book.

    With all of these considerations in mind, I don't care that you don't accept the science on evolution, it doesn't effect me, and it doesn't effect any of us. It only effects you, and your personal psychological map. How you view the whole, how you interact with the people around you.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I was bout to type that I haven't seen people calling non-evolutionists stupid, but realized that that was not true. On the other hand, if you've been following R&S enough you will have seen a number of questions and answers from both sides that don't inspire confidence in the current educational system.

    I tend to believe that based on the majority of Christian's statements about evolution, that most of them have not pursued the sciences past High School, nor are willing to do any sort of research beyond "Creationist pseudo science" websites.

    So no, I personally don't call either side stupid, but there is a tendency for Christians to be woefully uneducated in the sciences and strangely gullible when it comes to what some Creationists pawn off as science.


    Not quite sure about your use of the word "candor" and what it would have to do with assessing some one's cognitive ability.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Calling someone names is always a substitute for reasoned debate. Sometimes a person speaks from ignorance, but people can be well informed on an idea or an issue and simply disagree. Certainly sincere, intelligent people can passionately disagree about political ideologies, religious beliefs and even science. Is one "wrong"? That depends on what the expectations are.

    In the case of evolution vs. creationism, the fire may be in disagreement over terms. Evolutionists seek to determine how life developed. Creationists are more concerned with why. Each side has flaws. Evolutionists can't demonstrate the moment and process by which life arose from non-life, in part because the term "life" is so hard to define. Where on the organic spectrum does one draw the line? Creationists suffer from the fact that asserting "God did it," doesn't explain anything, and scientific testing is impossible. Even under the guise of "Intelligent Design", associating the perception of incomprehensible complexity to the work of a super-being is essentially scientific sloth. The correct response is, "We don't understand it, YET."

    Either side could be correct. Perhaps almighty God simply spoke the universe into being. (No way to prove it.) Or God "designed" the universe to unfold the way it has. (This is a matter of semantics.) Or this particular universe spontaneously arose with physical principles that made the development of organic life possible. (Characteristics derived from observation, but without a determinative initiation scenario.)

    A primary difference between the two approaches is the sense of "certainty". While confident of the general principles of genetics, evolutionists admit that the historical parts of the theory are hypothetical and subject to revision in light of new evidence. Creationists are stuck asserting that "God did it", with no way to develop and improve their assertion. Refinements of the "how" of creation must be referred to their scientific antagonists.

    There is an old saying about science and religion. By themselves they are either lame or blind. There is little serious disagreement about how to do science. There is tremendous disagreement about spirtuality. Each discipline has its ignoramuses and fools, as well as its own integrity and wisdom.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    That you put the discredited Behe on your list was also telling. No, I won't say you are stupid. As much as I think you should know better, I will just assume that you are deluded. I give you kudos on your intelligence, your family and home, and even wish you well with your belief in Jesus.. If you simply believe in a creation, but acknowledge the advances in the sciences of biology, anthropology, geology and astrophysics fine, but if you are one of the creationists that believe in a young earth and deny all scientific evidence for fossils, and the age of the planet, then I simply have to doubt your reason.


    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Putting aside your question for a moment, you are threatening those answering with looking foolish, not a good way to get people to give you their opinions.

    Back to the question:

    The reason the term "stupidity" gets thrown about is because of your ability to ignore what a large majority of people accept as logical and you base that decision not on evidence but on faith. I feel that it is illogical to believe in a process that the majority of the scientific community holds no stock in.

    Go ahead and insult my cognitive ability if you want.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    wow i have completed a Ph.D in computer science this therefore makes me an authority does it? no, people are free to think and believe what they want, you seem to be a christian, obviously with you 'I'm a creationist' bit, now that makes me wonder why then you near enough say 'I'm going to judge you' with your bit about cognitive ability. that does interest me. seeing as your bible teaches you not to judge

    i have an a level in biology wow awesome and a degree in physics i could go on but i don't suppose that's much the point

    i won't say your stupid for believing what you do, that would be to generalize, if you can provide an intelligent reasoning as to why then that's very well i won't stop you, i would say someone with a lack of understanding about evolution and therefore just accepting creationism was being niave and should research it and come to an informed choice

    so don't judge me and i won't judge you


    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    When one receives a higher education, they usually learn more about science and logic which sometimes gives them enough pause to question their religion and beliefs. But that isn't always the case, especially those that attend Christian colleges. Of course, if you go to a Christian school... nothing that conflicts with Christianity will be taught.

    I think there ARE some intelligent Christians, albeit misguided. Most staunch, unwavering Christians, however, are not well educated because education usually leads them to question and apply logic to life, science and history. And the application of logic in Christianity contradicts their religion.

    I should know, my Christian parents told me not to attend college because I'd be corrupted by the world and would be told "lies". After college, I became agnostic.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    Evolution is concept and a truth. A conception which has withstood one hundred fifty years of study with a huge selection of emperical proof so quit mendacity. Nobody has ever claimed that there arent any unanswered questions despite the fact that... The best factor theists can arise with is bad arguments and pseudo technological know-how inspired through their infantile stuborrnness a los angeles "considering i says so for this reason thats the way in which it's"

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Belief in creation is negatively correlated with education and intelligence, but not perfectly. I think that It's a matter of emotion and connection to the community. The human mind needs and demands meaning. It searches desperately to find meaning in life. When one is engaged ina community of believers, it is even harder to be skeptical, because then you are breaking ties with everyone and sequestering yourself from the community. So there is alot of positive incentive to believe with the status quo. It's no coincidence that smart people are very clever at rationalizing beliefs which are very difficult to believe. For more information, see Michael Shermer's books and lectures concerning "why smart people believe in weird things".

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Well, a lot of young-earth believers have a bad habit of mistaking a physical science to be a theology, thinking that the word "theory" means 'guess", parroting some of the most unscientific articles I've EVER read.....so, you have to kind of take it with a grain of salt that you are being lumped in with those who have a 70 IQ and try to argue science vs. faith on the internet.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.